Evaluating the Efficacy of Knowledge-Transfer Interventions on Animal Health Knowledge of Rural Working Equid Owners in Central Ethiopia: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of several knowledge-transfer interventions about donkey health, utilizing a cluster-randomized controlled trial (c-RCT), on the long-term knowledge change (~6 months post intervention) of Ethiopian rural working equid owners. Knowledge transfer interventions included: an audio programme, a village meeting and a diagrammatic hand-out, which were also compared to a control group, which received no intervention. All interventions addressed identical learning objectives. Thirty-two villages were randomly selected and interventions randomly assigned to blocks of eight villages. All participants in a village received the same intervention, and knowledge levels were assessed by questionnaire administration both pre and post intervention. Data analysis included multilevel linear and logistic regression models (allowing for clustering of individuals within villages) to evaluate the change in knowledge between the different knowledge-transfer interventions, and to look at other factors associated with change in knowledge. A total of 516 randomly selected participants completed pre-intervention questionnaires, 476 undertook a post-dissemination questionnaire ~6 months later, a follow-up response rate of 92%. All interventions significantly improved the overall knowledge score on the post intervention questionnaire compared to the control group, with the diagrammatic hand-out [coefficient (coef) 10.0, S.E. = 0.5] and the village meeting (coef 8.5, S.E = 0.5) having a significantly greater impact than the audio programme (coef 4.0, S.E = 0.5). There were differences in learning across interventions, learning objectives, age and education levels of the participants. Participants with higher levels of formal education had greater knowledge change but this varied across interventions. In conclusion, knowledge of donkey health was substantially increased by a diagrammatic hand-out and the impact of this simple, low-cost intervention should be further evaluated in other communities in low-income countries. This study should assist in the design and development of effective knowledge-transfer materials for adult learning for rural villagers in low-income countries.

Human Behaviour Change Interventions in Animal Care and Interactive Settings: A Review and Framework for Design and Evaluation

“…One key area in which humans use and care for animals that no behaviour change interventions were found is the use of animals for entertainment. Interventions in the animal production setting mainly involved pig and cattle farming, with two papers on working donkeys [ 34 , 35 ], and single papers on sheep [ 36 ], mink [ 37 ], and abattoir handling [ 38 ]. Two studies focused on the use of animals in research, associated animal care, and the 3 Rs (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) [ 39 , 40 ].…”

“…General knowledge was the most commonly targeted behavioural antecedent with many studies predicated on the assumption that if people were more informed about the issue, they would perform the desired behaviours, e.g., [ 52 , 53 ]. Stringer et al [ 34 ] and Stringer et al [ 35 ] targeted knowledge exclusively and did not discuss human behaviour change, but instead asserted that ‘One approach to decrease the prevalence of wounds is through education of donkey users.’ (p. 91). This would undoubtably involve a change in the owner’s behaviour but this was not recognised or discussed.…”

“…Several studies compared the efficacy of different types of interventions. Stringer et al [ 35 ] and Stringer et al [ 34 ] compared three delivery modes; a diagrammatic handout, a village meeting, and a radio drama. In both trials, (2011 and 2018) they found that the handout and village meeting were more effective than the radio program.…”

“…Lectures/information sessions on animal behaviour [48,52] and nutrition [44] Information on animal needs [52,66,69,70], animal husbandry [34,35,41,54,69] and animal disease [43,44,53,54,83] Information on animal welfare issues [38,51], Five Freedoms, and definitions of cruelty [69,84] Leaflet on common animal diseases and prevention measures [43] Increasing knowledge and changing beliefs (TPB, SCogT, IMB)…”

“…Appendix A [85] Dog bite prevention Children (9-11 yo) RCT with pre-post measurements Y No-mentions HBM in intro Spiegel [93] Dog bite prevention Children (5-12 yo) Pre-post N No Stringer et al [34] Working donkey health Adult RCT, cluster randomised (village) Y Participatory Situation Analysis Stringer et al [35] Working…”